On the agenda

1. 1Call to Order - Roll Call▶ 0:00
2. 2

   ↳You arrived here from a search for “Advanced education program” — transcript expanded below

   Discussion of American Rescue Plan Act Funds

   discussed

   Staff presented a proposed spending plan for the City's estimated $7,033,259 in American Rescue Plan Act (ARPA) funds, to be distributed in two halves over two years. The plan allocates funds across revenue loss replacement, staffing/payroll (including hazard pay and a behavioral health worker), programs (affordable housing, business assistance, utility assistance, advanced education), projects (Railroad Square, library/fire station #2 cost increases, stormwater, septic-to-sewer, cybersecurity), and preventative measures. Council discussed reallocating funds toward affordable housing and clarified the plan represents new spending above the regular budget.

   • direction:Council expressed interest in increasing affordable housing allocation, with a suggestion to start at $400,000, potentially by reallocating from stormwater projects. (none)

   📍west of US Highway 19, north of Trouble Creek🏢Gulf High School🏢Gulf Middle School🏢U.S. Department of Treasury👤Andy👤Councilman Peters👤Crystal Feast👤Debbie Manz👤Nate👤Pete👤Rachel#ARPA#Advanced education program#Affordable housing revolving loan fund#American Rescue Plan Act#Behavioral healthcare worker program#Business assistance program#CRA#Cybersecurity upgrades#Fire Station #2#Hazard pay for essential workers#Library project#Master plan program#Railroad Square improvements#Septic to sewer conversion#Stormwater improvement projects#Utilities assistance program

   ▶ Jump to 0:29 in the video

   ▸Show transcriptHide transcript

   Auto-transcript · machine-generated, may contain errors

   [00:00:29] Okay. Ms. Manz, talk to us. I'd be glad to, Mr. Mayor. The purpose of tonight's work session [00:00:39] is to consider some proposals for use of American Rescue Plan Act funds. [00:00:48] And in that regard, Crystal Feast has put together a PowerPoint presentation which she will be [00:00:57] presenting to you. And at the conclusion of her presentation... [00:01:02] Are you all hearing that terrible noise? Just now. [00:01:13] I will present the specific proposed spending plan which I think [00:01:20] is compliant with both the directives of the Department of Treasury as it relates to [00:01:31] the use of funds and additionally and more important and equally important, [00:01:38] consistent with our experience as it relates to COVID-19. [00:01:43] With that, I'd like to turn it over to Crystal. Pull your mic in. [00:01:50] Good evening. [00:02:02] All right. So before we go over the proposed spending plan of the American Rescue Plan Act [00:02:09] funds, we'll start with a little bit of background information. [00:02:20] I do have it turned on. [00:02:23] It's not working. [00:02:24] Did I mute? [00:02:33] I have been on mute. Is everything working from your end? [00:02:37] I will find out. [00:02:41] I don't know. We've got technical issues, but we'll be happy to get a call in here. [00:02:44] Nate, you're going to need to get Councilman Peters remoted in, too. [00:03:14] Yeah. [00:03:21] Okay. [00:03:25] Okay. [00:03:55] Rachel, you're welcome to come down closer so you can actually see the stuff on the PowerPoint. [00:04:19] No pressure, Nate, but we'll wait on you. [00:04:26] They wait patiently, Nathan, no problem. [00:04:36] I got snacks. We're all good. [00:04:47] He ain't going to make it. He's waiting on FHP. [00:04:52] Oh no. [00:04:57] He's okay, though, and good. [00:05:08] Thank you. [00:05:13] So what will he do, Nathan? [00:05:22] He'll pop on the screen? Good. [00:05:27] For everybody that's watching at home, we're waiting for one more council member to pop in. [00:05:33] He got unavoidably detained. [00:05:43] It was to you and I. [00:05:52] I got the whole thing. He had my map. [00:05:57] You and I were on both of them. He's got my phone, so I was thinking, I just got to talk to him. [00:06:02] I didn't realize he's got slides. [00:06:07] I didn't get any of my phone. [00:06:13] I hope I don't get an action from home. [00:06:28] The chief was saying Tuesday night about people driving like men. [00:06:33] It was a catty corner from where I live. [00:06:39] Hello? [00:06:44] Hello. [00:06:49] Hi there. Sorry, guys. [00:06:54] No problem, as long as you're okay. [00:06:59] Mr. Peters is with us. [00:07:05] Crystal? [00:07:11] Before we get started with actually giving you the proposed spending plan, [00:07:16] we're going to start with a little background information on the American Rescue Plan Act. [00:07:21] It was passed on March 11, 2021, [00:07:26] and it provides a total of $360 billion in relief for states and local governments. [00:07:31] Of that amount, municipalities are set to receive $61.1 billion of that money. [00:07:40] The city is estimated to receive $7,033,259. [00:07:47] The state of Florida has filed an extension on the distribution of those funds to some municipalities, [00:07:53] and so we can expect to receive half of that money in August and then the second half a year from now. [00:08:02] There are some larger cities, those metropolitan cities, [00:08:07] who are getting the funds directly from the U.S. Department of Treasury, [00:08:12] and so they have already started receiving those funds. [00:08:17] But for what they call non-entitlement cities, which would be your smaller communities, [00:08:23] we receive our funds from the state, and so we have to wait on that distribution. [00:08:29] Next slide. [00:08:35] The U.S. Department of Treasury has released guidelines on what the funds can be used for, [00:08:41] and so that's what we'll go over now. [00:08:47] So the first eligible use is to support public health by funding COVID-19 mitigation efforts, [00:08:57] and that would include things like PPE purchases, ventilation improvements, [00:09:05] providing behavioral health services, things of that nature. [00:09:10] The second item is to assist businesses in replacing lost revenue, [00:09:15] and that would also include the city. [00:09:20] So the city obviously was impacted by COVID just as other businesses were throughout the country and the state, [00:09:27] and so we can use some of those funds to help replace some of that lost revenue. [00:09:34] The third item is to cover costs associated with rehiring staff to pre-pandemic levels, [00:09:40] and next is to provide premium pay to essential workers. [00:09:45] So there are some people who were considered essential and were, you know, [00:09:52] had higher risk of exposure throughout the pandemic, [00:09:57] and so the funds are eligible to provide them with some hazard pay or premium pay. [00:10:02] Next. [00:10:07] We can also use the funds to improve access to clean water by supporting the installation of wastewater and stormwater infrastructure, [00:10:26] and to expand access to broadband Internet and protect vital IT resources, [00:10:31] which we found very necessary during the pandemic when, you know, [00:10:37] obviously technology was of huge importance during that time. [00:10:45] So now we're going to go into the proposed spending plan, [00:10:50] and you'll see that we have it separated by category, [00:10:55] and we have proposed to you the spending of the total amount that's expected to be received, [00:11:00] and you can see that it's divided over the two years that we plan on receiving those funds. [00:11:06] So the first category is revenue loss, [00:11:11] and first year we're proposing to use $1,343,259 of the American Rescue Plan funds to cover revenue loss, [00:11:25] and in the second year, $500,000, and I have future slides that will show you how we got to that amount. [00:11:31] The second category is staffing and payroll, [00:11:36] so we're proposing $240,000 in year one and $75,000 in year two. [00:11:41] Programs, we're proposing $725,000 of the funds be used toward programs. [00:11:48] Projects is next, and you can see that that's the largest category where we're proposing funds be used. [00:11:54] So year one would be $1,225,000, and year two would be $2,775,000. [00:12:03] The last category is purchases and preventative measures, [00:12:09] and that's $55,000 in year one, $95,000 in year two. [00:12:14] Next slide. [00:12:20] So we're going to go through the actual details and programs within those categories. [00:12:28] So the first category is revenue loss, [00:12:33] and so municipalities can obviously use a portion of the funds to replace revenue loss during the pandemic. [00:12:40] Doing this will allow them to continue providing public service without, you know, [00:12:46] having to do any future cuts, so that was the purpose of this category. [00:12:54] So this slide will provide you with a calculator that incorporates the methodology that the U.S. [00:13:03] Department of Treasury has provided for recipients to use. [00:13:08] They were pretty specific on how we can calculate what this revenue loss can be. [00:13:13] And so I'll go through and explain the calculator and that formula, but I'll start at the bottom. [00:13:21] So you see that in red at the bottom, the reduction in revenue that has been calculated for 2020 is $1,893,259. [00:13:34] So about an 8.3 percent revenue loss is what has been calculated for 2020. [00:13:40] So to get to that number, we'll start at step one. [00:13:45] The U.S. Department of Treasury determined that a base year period had to be established, [00:13:52] and so the guidelines said that, let me get to my page. [00:14:02] The guidelines said that that has to be the last completed fiscal year before the pandemic, [00:14:08] and for us, for the city of New Port Richey, that was fiscal year 19, so 9-30-2019. [00:14:15] And that was actually, you know, all audited and complete, [00:14:20] so we were able to confidently use that as our base year. [00:14:25] The second step is to establish a calculation date, and so the guidelines for that is, you know, [00:14:31] you have to have an end point. [00:14:36] They've established end points in the guideline, and so you have to go by calendar year. [00:14:41] So the first end point that we can use to calculate what our, you know, [00:14:46] our period of revenue loss would be is 12-31-2020. [00:14:51] That's the end point that we could use, the first end point that we could use. [00:14:56] So we're doing our base year period, and the calculation date is 15-31-2020. [00:15:00] So that's the amount of time that we're going to use [00:15:04] to calculate what our counterfactual revenue is, [00:15:10] our hypothetical revenue is. [00:15:13] So going down to step three, [00:15:15] the revenue for our base year that we've established [00:15:19] is calculated to be $21,811,591. [00:15:26] And so that is all city revenue, [00:15:29] excluding certain items [00:15:30] that the U.S. Department of Treasury said [00:15:33] could not be included in this calculation. [00:15:35] And so some of those exclusions [00:15:37] were federal and state grants, [00:15:41] debt proceeds, if we had received any debt proceeds [00:15:44] in fiscal year 19, we had to back those out. [00:15:47] And then also all utility revenue. [00:15:49] So our water and sewer department, [00:15:51] basically I had to exclude that from the calculation [00:15:54] in order to come up with the base year revenue. [00:15:57] Step four is a growth rate. [00:16:01] 4.1% was used, and this is the national average growth rate [00:16:05] for local and state governments [00:16:07] that basically was provided [00:16:08] by the U.S. Department of Treasury. [00:16:10] So they're saying that, you know, [00:16:11] in any given year we can expect, [00:16:15] municipality can expect an average growth rate of 4.1%, [00:16:19] given no other external circumstances. [00:16:23] So we use the base year revenue and that growth rate [00:16:27] to calculate what our counterfactual revenue is, [00:16:29] our, like this hypothetical revenue. [00:16:31] So what we would have, an estimate of the revenue [00:16:36] we would have received without the pandemic in 2020. [00:16:41] And so that number is $22,935,106. [00:16:47] So I take that revenue and I compare it [00:16:49] to what we actually received in 2020. [00:16:54] And so it's actually October 2019 [00:16:58] through December 31st, 2020. [00:17:00] So we actually received $21,041,847. [00:17:06] So the difference of this hypothetical, [00:17:08] our counterfactual revenue, [00:17:10] compared to what we actually received during the pandemic, [00:17:14] the difference of that is what we can use [00:17:17] as our revenue loss. [00:17:20] And that's where we get to the $1,893,259. [00:17:26] You'll notice that that number is smaller [00:17:29] than what's going to be included [00:17:31] in our proposed spending plan. [00:17:33] And that's because we know that we have some other [00:17:39] important projects and programs [00:17:42] that we want to use this American Rescue Plan money for. [00:17:45] And so because there was some flexibility [00:17:50] in this number, we reduced it some [00:17:54] so that we can propose to use [00:17:56] some other programs and projects. [00:17:59] And then we also, instead of taking it [00:18:01] all in the first year of distribution, [00:18:03] we've spread it out over the two distributions. [00:18:08] And you'll see that at the end. [00:18:11] Next slide. [00:18:13] And so the revenue loss that we're indicating [00:18:19] for year one and year two of the proposed spending plan [00:18:23] actually aggregate into less than what we lost [00:18:28] in the 2020 year. [00:18:29] And we're not projecting to take anything additional [00:18:32] for the 2021 year. [00:18:36] I think it's additionally appropriate to note [00:18:40] that the Department of Treasury allows us [00:18:42] the opportunity in this program [00:18:47] to appropriate funding to support [00:18:50] the administrative expenses associated [00:18:53] with administering the programs, projects, [00:18:59] and activities and preventative measures [00:19:02] that we put in place. [00:19:04] From a staff perspective, we thought it was much [00:19:07] more important to fund the programs and projects [00:19:10] rather than to take staff expenses. [00:19:13] So we decided not to put any money [00:19:18] into that program expense. [00:19:22] Is there a percentage cap on it? [00:19:25] 10, 10%. [00:19:27] And if you'll allow me, I'll go into [00:19:31] the specific staffing expense, [00:19:35] which is the first funding category [00:19:39] that is listed on your spending plan. [00:19:42] The first is staffing and payroll, [00:19:44] and there are four funding expenditures [00:19:47] that we are asking your consideration for. [00:19:50] The first is COVID-19 related overtime. [00:19:54] We're asking for a year one appropriation [00:19:57] in the amount of $50,000. [00:20:00] That is not the figure that represents [00:20:05] our true overtime related to COVID. [00:20:08] That is the amount of overtime [00:20:10] that we were not reimbursed for [00:20:12] from another funding source. [00:20:17] Unemployment claims, we are asking for reimbursement [00:20:22] in the amount of $40,000. [00:20:25] Our unemployment claims were actually higher [00:20:28] than that as well, but we are asking for $40,000. [00:20:33] We think we can balance out the rest [00:20:37] through our revenue loss money. [00:20:40] We are recommending an appropriation [00:20:43] in the amount of $75,000, both in year one [00:20:47] and in year two, to provide the services [00:20:52] of a behavioral healthcare worker. [00:20:55] This item was introduced to you more fully last night [00:20:59] as part of the police department presentation [00:21:02] by the police chief for networking, [00:21:07] primarily with social service agencies [00:21:10] so that we could provide assistance [00:21:15] and referrals as determined to be appropriate [00:21:20] through the police department. [00:21:23] The last recommendation we have for you [00:21:26] is a $75,000 appropriation in year one. [00:21:31] It is hazard pay for essential workers. [00:21:35] And it relates to a federal program [00:21:39] that has been put in place [00:21:41] where first responders receive an appropriation [00:21:46] from another funding source [00:21:50] for their service during COVID-19. [00:21:54] We feel strongly that there are other essential workers [00:21:57] within the city workforce that are equally deserving [00:22:02] of recognition for their effort during COVID-19. [00:22:06] So we have established an appropriation [00:22:08] for use in rewarding them [00:22:11] for their extraordinary exposures during COVID-19. [00:22:18] The next category of spending is programs. [00:22:22] And we have five programs [00:22:25] that we are asking you to consider, [00:22:27] all of which we are asking for funding in year one. [00:22:31] The first is an appropriation in the amount of $200,000. [00:22:38] The funding would be used [00:22:39] to fix up foreclosed properties and to renovate them [00:22:45] and to make them available [00:22:46] to low or moderate income families. [00:22:53] And the second is referred to [00:22:55] as business enhancement activities. [00:22:59] And it is to provide opportunities [00:23:03] in the city's business core district of the downtown [00:23:09] to get consumers into the downtown on a regular basis [00:23:16] so that those businesses have an opportunity [00:23:21] to recoup some of the revenues [00:23:23] that they've lost during COVID-19. [00:23:27] We are proposing a business assistance program [00:23:30] in the amount of $400,000, [00:23:33] which would be offered in the form of both loans [00:23:37] and grants in implementing the master plan program [00:23:45] so that businesses could make physical improvements [00:23:50] to their properties. [00:23:57] The utilities assistance program [00:24:00] that we are recommending is in the amount of $50,000. [00:24:05] And that is to provide families or individuals [00:24:12] that are in need of help with their water utility bills [00:24:17] as a result of a COVID-19 experience assistance [00:24:23] with that indebtedness. [00:24:27] We are recommending a business assist, I'm sorry, [00:24:32] an advanced education program in the amount of $25,000, [00:24:38] which would be administered through the library. [00:24:41] And it would be a program that is geared [00:24:47] towards providing training and learning [00:24:53] to those that fell behind during COVID-19 [00:24:58] and some of their learning. [00:25:02] The projects, go ahead. [00:25:04] We sure can. [00:25:07] Go back, please, Nathan, thank you. [00:25:10] That advanced education program, [00:25:11] are we going to be in tied with Gulf High and Gulf Middle? [00:25:16] Andy, would you care to respond to the question [00:25:19] and talk more directly about the program? [00:25:26] These would be educational opportunities [00:25:28] that would be available for different students. [00:25:34] They would take form of ESOL classes, GED classes, [00:25:40] the career online high school program. [00:25:44] So a lot of adult learners, [00:25:47] just trying to assist them with job placement and getting. [00:25:52] Not the youth that didn't have the computer at home, [00:25:55] we're looking more at adults. [00:25:57] More toward adults, but we also have [00:26:01] many different resources available for students [00:26:05] like the Wi-Fi hotspots and additional online training [00:26:10] that they could earn their CEUs [00:26:13] toward different types of programs and certifications. [00:26:19] Okay, that's fine, thank you. [00:26:20] I understand that, because I just thought about [00:26:23] these kids that didn't have a computer at home. [00:26:25] Sat around, did nothing. [00:26:27] The other one that I want to ask about [00:26:28] is the affordable housing development. [00:26:31] And I saw that down on the business assistance program. [00:26:34] Is that affordable housing going to have [00:26:37] a grant and loan division, too, or separation? [00:26:46] Because we're going to be able to get some recoupment. [00:26:50] It's a revolving loan fund. [00:26:52] Yeah, and then we could get some back [00:26:53] and then help somebody else. [00:26:54] Yes, that's exactly how the program would be administered. [00:26:58] It's all going to be loans, [00:26:59] there won't be any grants. [00:27:00] That's right. [00:27:01] Okay, well that's why I asked. [00:27:04] Okay, because I'd like for the program to continue on. [00:27:11] He says I've got to talk a little. [00:27:13] Okay. [00:27:13] I forgot the word. [00:27:15] All right, I just want to, [00:27:16] because I think that could be a revolving program [00:27:18] that could stay around for a while. [00:27:20] That's our plan. [00:27:24] I want to address that, too, [00:27:24] but I'll wait until we get to the bottom of the thing. [00:27:28] Then we'll open it up. [00:27:30] The projects that we're recommending for funding [00:27:35] are railroad square improvements. [00:27:38] And we're recommending that that project be funded [00:27:41] in the amount of $775,000 in the first year, [00:27:46] $775,000 in the second year, [00:27:50] so that we can fully implement the improvements [00:27:54] and that space can be used to benefit [00:27:57] the downtown business community. [00:28:00] We're asking for an appropriation in the amount of $350,000 [00:28:05] to cover the increase in construction costs [00:28:09] largely attributed to our library project [00:28:14] and our fire station number two project. [00:28:21] And it would cover the increases [00:28:23] specifically related to steel and lumber [00:28:28] that have occurred as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic. [00:28:35] We are recommending stormwater improvement projects [00:28:39] in the amount of $950,000 to occur in the downtown area. [00:28:46] In year two, we are recommending septic to sewer conversion [00:28:52] in the west of US Highway 19, north of Trouble Creek area [00:28:59] in the amount of $950,000 in year two. [00:29:04] Cyber security upgrades in the amount of $100,000 [00:29:10] in year one and year two. [00:29:14] And the last items that we have recommended for you [00:29:20] are really purchases and preventative measures. [00:29:23] We would like to establish hand sanitizing stations [00:29:27] in our parks in year one in the amount of $25,000. [00:29:33] We would like to install and maintain HVAC filters [00:29:38] in all of our public buildings. [00:29:41] And that would cost $30,000 in year one and year two [00:29:46] of the funding. [00:29:52] And we are asking for a technology friendly locker system [00:29:56] for the library in year two of the funding. [00:30:00] program, which would be funded in the amount of $65,000, which would mean the [00:30:07] grand totals of year one and year two would roughly be $3.5 million of our [00:30:17] total $7,333,000 in funding that we are due to receive through the [00:30:34] American Rescue Plan Act. We do have three years to spend the money, but when [00:30:43] it came down to, or after Crystal and I learned that the money was to be [00:30:48] distributed in two years rather than one year, and there were so many worthy [00:30:54] projects to consider and so many areas of eligible projects for us to consider, [00:31:06] it became really easy to come up with ways to spend the money. We wish there [00:31:13] would have been a third year of funding. Okay. And we're prepared to respond to [00:31:19] any questions that you have. A question, I guess, for you guys, but a policy [00:31:26] question for my colleagues as well. Is that affordable housing number adequate [00:31:36] to address the need? And if it's not, I would suggest we could pull some money [00:31:44] out of the loans to business owners pot and put it in the affordable housing [00:31:50] development pot. But I don't have a good feel for what that need is right now. [00:31:58] If you'd allow me to speak, it's not enough money. It's not enough money to [00:32:05] fully address the need. We have vacant property which we hope to sell to put [00:32:14] more money in this fund. And my first thought is if we want to feed more [00:32:26] initial money into this program, I would rather take it from one of our storm [00:32:36] water projects than from the business community projects only because we [00:32:44] didn't appropriate anything in the CRA for those types of programs this year. [00:32:51] Okay, I really think the affordable housing thing is important. It's to [00:32:58] the extent that we can help people get out of rental situations and get into [00:33:05] home ownership, that's a first step up out of their economic situation. [00:33:14] So, you know, I'll toss it to you guys as well. If you like that idea, maybe we [00:33:21] ought to allocate some more to it. Is there a number that you think would get [00:33:28] us in the ballpark of being more adequate? I would say start with four. [00:33:37] 400,000. Pete, what do you think? Well, I think that the missing part of this is [00:33:50] for me is that we already have programs in our normal budget. So I want to make [00:33:58] sure that the spending plan is for a month over and above the money that we [00:34:04] are already contemplating. So I'd like some clarification. Are all of these [00:34:10] spending plan dollars we have not seen in the proposed budget to this date? [00:34:17] That's correct. So we've just got announced the funding for this 750 or [00:34:32] whatever it is, thousand dollars for the housing project. I think, Mr. Mayor, you [00:34:39] announced you got the award letter on that. Right. So I think that rather [00:34:45] than try to pick a number today, I think we should probably just talk in general [00:34:50] about the division, the items that they've selected to support. And I know [00:34:58] this is a work session, but I don't know how much of that 750,000 we're actually [00:35:04] going to get into the project. I do have another comment about a different item [00:35:14] when we get to it, when we get to something next. You've got the floor, Pete. [00:35:18] Go for it. Okay. So in the comment of putting the line share of this project [00:35:30] into the pedestrian walkable corridor, which I fully support that [00:35:39] corridor and the project, I'm just wondering from the standpoint of the [00:35:43] intention of the American Rescue Funds, if we should not spend some time and [00:35:52] review the plan that we've paid a good bit of money for from the consultant [00:35:59] and consider making immediate improvements across the downtown so that [00:36:08] we can avoid the idea that this is concentrated to the benefit of certain [00:36:13] businesses that are on there only. My point would be we could take [00:36:18] elements of the railroad square that related to shade, lighting, Wi-Fi, [00:36:25] whatever, and instead of calling it out as railroad square, we could [00:36:32] generally identify those items that help to support the overall goal. [00:36:39] I mean, there's the shade that's needed in other sections. I would [00:36:46] rather see a downtown sort of citywide and perhaps even broader dispersion of [00:36:53] this money on the same argument that we're trying to make sure that we [00:36:58] fairly divide it out. I'm fully in support of supporting that program. I [00:37:03] know we've got other revenue sources we can look to as well. The spending of [00:37:10] steel and making additional covering overages in those buildings, I don't know [00:37:21] what those numbers came up with because we fell short in the money that we have [00:37:25] either borrowed or allocated for those projects or they just went way over [00:37:30] budget. So it's premature for me to just agree without understanding what went [00:37:37] wrong with some of those constructions. I know we say the steel went up and we can [00:37:43] identify the cost of steel and I'm sure we'll get the details of the [00:37:52] qualification of them for the use of those dollars, but we're paying [00:37:59] more to our employees. We're helping our own balance [00:38:06] sheet by putting money into cover unemployment and other expenses in a [00:38:11] year in which we cut the budget. That backfills and adds additional income [00:38:21] into the current year and the use of so much of that income and calling it just [00:38:27] revenue concerns me as to whether or not if that supports this year's budget [00:38:35] then we're going to have to drop $750,000 from next year's budget because we have [00:38:40] less and then drop again to the future year. So I want to make sure that [00:38:45] what our budget is for our operations that we aren't just holding up a false [00:38:54] hope that somehow we'll get that much more money. I'm not sure where it's [00:39:00] going to come from in future years. So there's a lot of stuff to absorb. I [00:39:05] appreciate it. I think it's a good plan, but I'm certainly not ready to [00:39:12] say this is the plan without answering some of those questions. Yes, thank you. [00:39:19] Mike, do you have any thoughts? So thank you, Mayor. Just a couple [00:39:28] comments and I certainly understand about the revenue loss and [00:39:35] you know part of that is you know from my understanding you know our budget did [00:39:40] suffer and we did have to cut back and did not you know have the same revenue [00:39:47] we'd expected. So with that in mind you know following the formula that's [00:39:55] presented to us I think it's probably a wise move and sure I don't know that [00:40:00] we're going to grow our budget you know 1.4 and then the next year [00:40:06] $500,000 and we're going to continue that spending. We know that that money's not [00:40:10] going to be available in year three, but I too would support some additional [00:40:17] funds moving to affordable housing. My question was because I didn't not all it [00:40:24] came through was Mayor I think you were looking to move money into the number [00:40:32] let's see was it number number was it number one in our programs? Yes. Or was it [00:40:44] okay so you know I'm good with that. The only other question is and I like item [00:40:51] number three loans to property owners and grants to business owners and I'm [00:40:56] sure Crystal you probably already looked at this but my only question is on the [00:41:01] business assistant programs loans to property owners. Well you know if that if [00:41:08] we're setting up for reoccurring loans and bringing back and pay again I just [00:41:12] want to make sure that'll qualify under this act and we're not you know we're [00:41:17] not getting ourselves in a bind there because we expect that money to come [00:41:20] back to us. As long as that qualifies I'm fully supportive of that. That just was a [00:41:25] little question mark I had in my mind there. Overall from what you've [00:41:32] presented thus far you know I'm you know I'm in I'm in favor for it. Pete makes a [00:41:41] good point about the Railroad Square monies to maybe try to spread that [00:41:45] throughout downtown. If you know I'm thinking if we if we have some plans in [00:41:51] years two and three of doing some things differently downtown maybe we could [00:41:56] advance that a little bit and just kind of get this you know worked out. I'd be [00:42:01] open to at least to look at that. I am very interested in seeing the the [00:42:09] Railroad Square corridor complete. I think that along with what we've already [00:42:18] done kind of completes almost completes our downtown. We could maybe take a [00:42:22] breath and just then help work our businesses in the back downtown and in [00:42:29] focus some of our future funds going to to to spread the wealth out towards our [00:42:35] neighborhoods more so. So I still think that's a item is kind of come almost [00:42:43] completes our downtown core. It's all majors to see that get done. Thank you. [00:42:50] Matt any thoughts? Well similar to what he was with customer Peters was just [00:42:56] talking about we have our business programs, enhancement programs, assistance [00:43:00] programs, but how do we compare to our neighborhood revitalization programs and [00:43:06] like you're saying spreading that money out throughout the city not so much just [00:43:11] the businesses. I think the other component that I need to make sure you're [00:43:24] aware of and Councilman Altman referenced it was the housing [00:43:32] rehabilitation program and that is the seven hundred and fifty thousand eight [00:43:38] hundred thousand dollar grant that we just received for housing rehabilitation [00:43:43] purposes and that is really in addition to any money that we put into the [00:43:50] affordable housing development program. Okay so it's a different program. It is a [00:43:55] different program. It's not the same program. That is to institute necessary [00:44:01] housing upgrades and it is only available to low or moderate income [00:44:09] people that own their homes in the city. Okay we did have one member of the [00:44:18] public waving at me asking trying to get my attention. Rachel did you have [00:44:22] some thoughts that you wanted to share with us? Yes I do. One of the main points [00:44:30] for this rescue plan is for throughout for the whole community and one of the [00:44:38] ideas that I wish you would expand more would actually be to provide Wi-Fi for [00:44:44] all city residents and that is funded through this plan and it would improve [00:44:51] the equity for all. It would help relieve that price tag for residents, [00:44:59] businesses. [00:45:00] all throughout. It also would cover, there was money in there for two new grant programs [00:45:10] to help residents build digital skills to actually use forth that effort and would dramatically [00:45:18] bring up the equity for low barrier residents to actually get a job from where they're living. [00:45:24] I ran my whole campaign from my phone so if they have internet, they'll be able to do [00:45:29] a tremendous amount in changing their lives. So I really think that you should look into [00:45:33] expanding that. There's money also with the discount program through the FCC, through [00:45:42] the emergency fund also, so we could get discount broadband. So it wouldn't even be that high [00:45:48] of a price tag. So I'd like if you would re-evaluate that because it would really improve all of [00:45:55] downtown and make it another perk of living here, having free Wi-Fi. [00:45:59] Great, thank you very much. [00:46:02] Mr. Mayor? [00:46:04] Yes, sir. [00:46:06] Yes, sir. You know, to Rachel's point, the QCT chart for the city would be important [00:46:14] for us to look to. The Qualified Census Tracts, some of the things that we look to do are [00:46:25] probably going to have to happen in the Qualified Census Tracts, which is most of the city anyway, [00:46:31] and I'm sure that the staff has looked at that. But once we get back to the housing, [00:46:38] it would be my thought that the way it was described, folks who can move, as you've suggested, [00:46:47] from rental to home ownership, that as I mentioned last week, so much of what we do is being [00:46:56] done for folks that are moving out. So buying a property and then bringing new renters into [00:47:04] our city and making them homeowners may have the benefit of changing the percentage of [00:47:11] homeowner versus rental, but I'd be curious to know whether we could open this program [00:47:16] up for folks that are renting in the city, you know, so that this is a project and a [00:47:22] program for our residents that's available to them. I don't know if there are restrictions [00:47:27] on that or not, but I don't want to spend our money, that is a lot, but it's still limited [00:47:33] considering what Pasco County has for projects that bring someone else in rather than help [00:47:41] one of our own current residents. The final comment from me, one final, well, we can stay [00:47:49] on that topic. Yes, sir? [00:47:51] I just think that you are helping a landlord, you're not helping the employee, I mean the [00:47:58] renter, if you start doing that. So I question whether that will be in the program. [00:48:07] The way I heard it, we buy property, we fix it up and turn it into a house that we can [00:48:12] then sell to somebody. If I'm not mistaken, is this probably because we're buying a property [00:48:20] that nobody owns? My question is who's going to inhabit a job and I'd like that person [00:48:27] to be someone that's of need. We can have restrictions on living there for a year or [00:48:34] two, people have that program. Habitat's got a whole series of criteria they use for that [00:48:41] exact sort of thing and I would encourage us to take a look at what they're doing. But [00:48:46] that's the idea is to get home ownership. My question is should that home ownership [00:48:53] be to some county resident or should it be to someone who's living in the city who's [00:48:59] currently renting that we can move out of that rental and into a home? Interesting. [00:49:06] Or does it matter? Now that I understand, you were breaking up a little when you first [00:49:11] explained that. It might be worth looking to see if it's even legal for us to do that [00:49:18] sort of criteria to give city residents preference or an extra incentive. Yeah, I could check [00:49:26] with the city attorney. Yeah, let's do that. That's a good point. Yeah, it is. The other [00:49:35] thing to the fact that once we spread it out, there's always additional need in different [00:49:40] places. But under the funding from the state, under the SAIL program, the affordable housing [00:49:47] program, they increased the funding for that. That's not coming out of our money, but that [00:49:53] is $62.5 million. So putting these things in our budget, showing that we're intending [00:50:02] to do them, I think that it would be money well spent in order to make sure that the [00:50:10] city is able to leverage that dollar amount to whether it's the stormwater, because there's [00:50:17] a $500 million additional funds in the state in stormwater, or in resilience, in rebuilding [00:50:24] properties that are in a floodplain, flood-prone area. I think that this is the beginning of [00:50:32] the revenues that we have to deal with, but we're going to have to be aggressive to go [00:50:36] after those funds. I know Mike had asked for me to provide or to give some idea of what [00:50:44] those are, and I'll try to plan to do that next week when I get back in town and show [00:50:51] you some of these other projects. [00:50:53] One project that hasn't been mentioned is the Green Key Beach project, but it is outside [00:51:00] of the Qualified Census Tract, so it wouldn't qualify for us, but doing park improvement [00:51:07] is a qualified use. Some of this Stage 1 of the dog park, for example, if the Meadows [00:51:14] is a QCT, is an automatic qualifier as well. I think it's a great spending plan. As usual, [00:51:22] I would like to get a chance for us to mull it over and come back. I'm hesitant to just [00:51:33] say yes to such a huge opportunity without us mulling it over after just seeing it. [00:51:40] Excellent points. [00:51:41] Thank you. [00:51:42] Chopper, any other? [00:51:43] I know staff has worked real hard on going through and picking out items where they think [00:51:51] they would fit best in the city, but if I was sitting doing my budget at home, I might [00:51:56] have a couple other bills that I might try to pay a little bit and move some money around, [00:52:01] so Rachel coming up with an idea of the Wi-Fi, I'm sure there's a couple others you might [00:52:05] have as auxiliary alternates or something that we might take a look at and fund also [00:52:13] that you didn't put on this list that we might think as a body take a look at and discuss [00:52:20] since it's kind of a work session. It's in a work session situation now and that's when [00:52:28] look at more options, weed some in, weed some out. [00:52:32] And the Wi-Fi might be something that could be rolled out in a staged situation if we [00:52:40] figure we could do it. Coming immediately to mind, getting Wi-Fi in the parks would [00:52:46] be an obvious place if we could pull it off and I know enough of that right now to be [00:52:54] dangerous so I'll defer to Brian and our IT guys and folks that maybe have read up a little [00:53:01] more on what community Wi-Fi is doing, but it's certainly worth taking a look at. [00:53:08] I had one question on our projects. There's a couple on here that are partially funded, [00:53:14] so does that mean that they're partially funded already and this would complete it or that's [00:53:19] just the money we're throwing towards it? [00:53:22] It means a couple of different things. It means that 950 is not enough to fund it in [00:53:28] its entirety and it means that there is some grant funding already in place and as Crystal [00:53:37] has reminded me, I need to tell you that even though we're recommending these projects for [00:53:43] funding, we are always looking for grants and so we might find something that's available [00:53:50] and we're very aggressive about going for grants and if something comes up, we'll always [00:53:55] let you know. [00:53:56] All right, well I guess what I'm getting at, if there's something that we can combine to [00:54:00] actually fulfill one project and get one project done, I think that would be a better use of [00:54:06] trying to split it up. I'd rather see something be 100% funded and get done than... [00:54:12] They would be done. [00:54:13] Okay. [00:54:16] Mike, any... [00:54:17] They would be done. [00:54:18] Okay. [00:54:19] Both of them. [00:54:20] All right. [00:54:21] Yeah, thank you, Mayor. Yeah, Mayor, just to follow up there on Matt's comment there [00:54:30] about getting projects done, I like that idea and again, I think the staff did a great job [00:54:38] in trying to touch so many of the areas. You think, oh, this is a chunk of money. We can [00:54:45] do all kinds of things. You start spreading it out and all of a sudden, it doesn't go [00:54:49] as far as we think it might go. But I would applaud the wide range of programs that got [00:54:57] set in here. Particularly, I like the fact that we're spending some money there for sets [00:55:05] and sewer conversion. I think that is money well spent and that would give the city future [00:55:15] revenues. So, this one-time spend that we'll reap the rewards for on and on. [00:55:23] And I think that's what we have to be careful of here, is make sure that the items we do [00:55:29] select, I think the whole purpose is to take this money and spend it and be done. We've [00:55:35] got to be careful that we do something that's going to continue, you know, sets enough for [00:55:43] us continuing funding and if so, we've got to be in consideration of what that might [00:55:47] be. [00:55:48] Like, for example, the Wi-Fi, you know, as I read and understood, Wi-Fi was to get Wi-Fi [00:55:54] to communities that didn't currently have it available or poor reception to get it so [00:56:01] it's strong, but not necessarily to, you know, in other words, bring the pipes in, bring [00:56:08] the cables in necessarily to communities that don't have it and not necessarily to just [00:56:16] provide the Wi-Fi for residents for this year, next year and all the years to come. I don't [00:56:22] know if we can provide free Wi-Fi. It's like providing free water, but, you know, certainly, [00:56:30] you know, I think we have a lot of capabilities on that already, but there might be some room [00:56:39] there. [00:56:40] But I, you know, again, I congratulate the staff for spreading it out as much as they [00:56:47] did. I, yeah, and I don't have anything more than that to pick on it at this point. [00:57:00] Okay. Any other? [00:57:03] Final comment from me, Mr. Mayor. Yeah. It would be that I just want to also mirror the [00:57:12] comment that anything, whatever I, suggesting that we spread out the anti-heat shade and [00:57:24] the look at our consultant to start to implement things that show progress throughout the town [00:57:31] should not be meant that I'm not fully supportive of moving ahead full steam with the railroad [00:57:36] project. [00:57:37] I think the thing that's difficult in looking at these things one at a time is I think it's [00:57:44] next week or soon that we have the CRA budget. So what will really help to bring it together [00:57:50] for all of us, I guess, is when we see the cumulative effect of our city budget, our [00:57:55] Penny Perpasco budget, our CRA budget, and we can really see what we can do. [00:58:00] So to the degree, once again, in Penny Perpasco, that we should be following the suggestion [00:58:09] that we get these things in the ground, make the improvements, and begin to see that reap [00:58:14] the benefits economically, that we should be looking to fully fund projects with funds [00:58:22] that we have as they become available. [00:58:26] Very good. [00:58:27] And thank you again for letting me type in. [00:58:31] All right. I'm going to go ahead and wrap things up. Rachel, if you've got some other [00:58:36] comments you'd like to share with us. [00:58:39] I would like you to know that there are grants available through the Florida Department of [00:58:46] Economic Opportunity to prolong this effort. There's more money in grants than that. [00:58:52] So there's a lot of workshops and everything to be found. [00:58:56] Great. Thank you. And yeah, we definitely don't want this just to be a one- or two-year [00:59:01] thing. The Behavioral Health Worker being a perfect example, I would hope that that's [00:59:07] not just a two-year thing, that that's something that we'll plan on incorporating into the [00:59:13] budget going forward. As we discussed Tuesday night, it's much needed.

   This text was generated automatically from the meeting video. It is not a verbatim or official record. For exact wording, consult the video or the city clerk.

3. 4Adjournment▶ 59:19
4. 3Communications